Tom Gualtieri says, “the odds being 5 in every 100 are not the kind of odds I would to take a bet on should I have a son.”
—
Last year, in August of 2012, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) revised their position on circumcision, amending their earlier policy. In previous years (1971, 1975, 1983) the AAP had stated “that there was no valid medical indication for routine circumcision in the neonatal.” In 2012 their policy stated “new scientific evidence shows the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks of the procedure, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all newborn boys …” They further stated “infant male circumcision should be covered by insurance, which would increase access to the procedure for families who choose it.”
This change in the AAP’s policy conflicts directly with opinions of pediatric societies in most European nations as well as Australia and Canada.
After last year’s statement, a team of 38 doctors and scientists from 12 European nations, all representatives of medical associations for pediatrics, pediatric surgery, and pediatric urology in Northern Europe, released their own statement condemning the AAP’s opinion. The 8-member AAP task force, they say, reviewed evidence that has been called into question.
In their rebuttal, the international panel concluded, “claimed health benefits are … questionable, weak, and likely to have little public health relevance in a Western context … Circumcision fails to meet the commonly accepted criteria for the justification of preventive medical procedures in children … has no compelling health benefits, causes postoperative pain, can have serious long-term consequences, constitutes a violation of the United Nations’ Declaration of the Rights of the Child, and conflicts with the Hippocratic oath: primum non nocere: First, do no harm.”
Pretty strong stuff.
The results of a small study compiled by Danish researchers were published in the May 2013 Danish Medical Journal. The study used file data for 315 boys who had undergone circumcision from 1996-2003, with follow-up care data incorporated through 2011. Of the subjects 5% experienced significant complications. The researcher I consulted about this study told me, “significant is bad.” In other words, the use of the vague word “significant” is not as vague as it seems. “Significant” complications, in this context, means one or more corrective procedures were necessary. In some cases, irreparable, permanent harm could prevent normal use of the penis and its sexual function (provided you don’t already believe circumcision to be “irreparable harm.”)
Dr. M. David Gibbons, Associate Professor, Pediatric Urology at Georgetown University School of Medicine (who has an impressive list of affiliations in his field) says:
In my practice, as a pediatric urologist, I manage the complications of neonatal circumcision … in a two-year period, I was referred greater than 275 newborns and toddlers with complications of neonatal circumcision. Forty-five percent required corrective surgery — minor as well as major, especially for amputative injury. [With] 300 pediatric urologists in this country who have practices similar to mine … one can do the math.
Though the Danish study indicates only 5% of boys had “significant” complications, the odds being 5 in every 100 are not the kind of odds I would to take a bet on should I have a son.
In a Savage Love column from 2004, a young man wrote to Dan Savage to say, “I am 24 years old and lost my entire glans penis, the head of my dick, in a botched [neonatal] circumcision. Basically I have a shaft but there’s no head at the end …” Savage used this young man’s example in response to a reader’s inquiry about circumcising her expected son:
… even if the odds are low—even if they’re infinitesimal … I would rather teach my son to wash under his foreskin than assume even the tiniest risk of him losing the head of his penis in a botched circumcision.
Photo: amrufm/Flickr
My first son had a botched circumcision that required corrective surgery when he was 5. I knew about circumcisions, but I did not know the specifics until my child was involved. I had no clue that they strapped the baby to a table and used no anesthesia. The staff at the hospital kept telling us before the corrective surgery not to worry, that they do this kind of surgery all the time. This was LaBoneur Hospital in Memphis, TN. I was surprised that that many little boys had to have corrective surgery. He will still need another surgery for full… Read more »
I was neonatally circumcised at Holy Name Hospital in Teaneck, NJ in 1974 by David E. Landers without my consent and without my parents’ informed consent. He completely injured me. I had traumatic corrective meatotomy surgery at age 5 for meatal stenosis. I have other complications including pubic hair on my penile shaft during erection, due to removal of too much foreskin, and not enough skin for a comfortable erection. Infant circumcision is barbaric. What Landers did constitutes child sexual assault.
Risks Associated With Male Circumcision
“In large studies of infant circumcision in the United States, reported inpatient complication rates are approximately 0.2%1, 40, 41. The most common complications are bleeding and infection, which are usually minor and easily managed”
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/prevention/research/malecircumcision/risks.html
Please see my comments above.
Do you know what the Mogen clamp is, and why its maker is out of business?
The data used by CDC in that release was obtained directly from the US Medical Industry and its trade association that protect the union’s sources of income, including especially the practice of male, neonatal circumcision. The data are notoriously incomplete and deliberately misleading, designed solely to give false reassurances to parents, so they will sign consent form and pay the fees demanded.
and, it’s estimated to be a billion dollar a year business. That is considering the primary circumcisions, not the corrective operations afterwards, which the AAP is conservatively estimating at 1 in 500.
Gotta tell you I know of zero problems associated with circumcision…
I’m 56 yrs old & have 2 sons…
This is just PC silliness in my book.
When I was a kid, the boys who weren’t circumcised had Fathers who were “Austrian,not German” and worked in aerospace…
Advocates of female circumcision don’t believe it causes problems either. Mothers of circumcised daughters in Malaysia, Indonesia etc. will tell you just how problem free it is for them and their daughters.
Not exactly sure what you are trying to imply with your “Austrian, not German” comment, nor does it seem relevant to the topic at hand.
What I’m implying is anti-semitism may be at work in the studies you cite.
Ritual circumcision is not limited to Jewish tradition, so accusations of anti-semitism are purely speculation.
@ J.A. Drew Diaz: You exhibit all the symptoms of being a ferocious advocate of child circumcision of boys in the USA. You suggest that since your circumcision went well, then all go well, that there are no botches, and anyone who says so is a liar and cooking up Political Correctness and antisemitism. You also drag up the old canard that only (undesiragle) IMMIGRANTS are not circumcised, a classic ad hominem lie in itself. You are absolutely wrong on all counts. One study shows conclusively that the botch rate in a typical US city is at least 15% and… Read more »
So, because you don’t know anyone who had a problem, problems don’t exist. Think of it this way. If a doctor removed the head of your son in an accident, how eager would you be to go around telling people? I had a loved one who got meatal stenosis from his circumcision. He could pee a tiny stream, because of scarring of the opening. He had to have corrective surgery. I thought this was unusual. It’s not. It is so common, they can’t even estimate how common it is. Nobody keeps track of skin bridges, adhesions, hidden penis, and all… Read more »
This headline is a little misleading. The 5 out of 100 comes from a study on “RITUAL circumcision.”
As it says in the abstract, “As ritual circumcision is legal, a strong focus on high surgical/anaesthesiological standards is needed to avoid complications.”
And even if we were to base an opinion on this study it is worth noting they say, “No major complications were seen.”
I do appreciate you including the link to your source so we can read it for ourselves.
You do realize that American Circumcision is considered Ritual circumcision. If you read the entire thing, they only categorize it like that, as it was performed in a hospital with anesthesia which doesn’t even happen the majority of time in the U.S. It’s like like it was done in the backwoods of Africa or at someones house. The fact it was considered ritual is a moot point, I would say that calling it ritual just means they wanted it done because that’s what they do, like 99% of circumcisions that occur in the US. So I don’t think that the… Read more »
“In large studies of infant circumcision in the United States, reported inpatient complication rates are approximately 0.2% The most common complications are bleeding and infection, which are usually minor and easily managed”
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/prevention/research/malecircumcision/risks.html
Yes, even if that were the case we have larger studies about infant circumcision in the United States. So basing a claim from a Danish study of 315 boys I still think the title is misleading.
American researchers, especially researchers who are circumcised themselves, or members of religions where circumcision is a requirement (e.g. Judaism and Islam), have incentives to minimize circumcision complications, and/or not mention them at all. Another problem with American research is that, since most researchers more than likely lack a foreskin, they have little to recognize in the way of “complications.” Yes, men are walking around with botched circumcisions (e.g. too much shaft skin removed, skin tags, missing part of the glans etc.) and not know it. Not mentioned here are the “not-so-common complications” which are, in fact, partial or full ablation… Read more »
Yes, it is very convenient to dismiss every other study based on allegations you can’t prove, except for the ones you agree with. Money is not the only motivator in life.
I also forgot to mention the deaths in New York; 11 babies or so were infected with herpes, 2 of whom died. Infant herpes cases keep appearing at NYC hospitals, but the Jewish communities are protective of the mohels involved, and are not forthcoming as to their whereabouts. This is a clear example of people keeping silent to preserve a cherished tradition.
Fellows at American medical organizations obviously have financial conflict of interest (1.2 million circumcisions a year is a huge market), perhaps even religious ones that may be affecting the objectivity of their observations.
And exactly my point on ritual circumcisions.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/07/health/new-york-neonatal-herpes
It’s also important to note that the numbers you cite from the CDC do not provide follow-up data which is, of course, one of the main problems with the recording of circumcision complications. Since so much follow-up evidence is anecdotal, and there has been no major study on long-term complications, the reliance on CDC numbers is a weak argument. Immediate complications such as infection, blood loss etc and even death are not recorded back to the source. An infant cannot die of circumcision but he CAN die of blood loss or infection as a result of complications from a procedure.… Read more »
Hi Tom
Since you write this article you must be well read about this subject.
What about the loss of sensitivity ?
And one question . Can American parents choose or do hospitals simply cut all infants without the parents consent in 2013?
Iben: You are quite right to mention the loss of sensitivity. But it is more than that. Loss of the gliding and stretching action of the foreskin changes the sexual experience for both the man and his partner. This should be obvious from the nature of circumcision; but this fact is routinely ignored and denied by those who circumcise and often by the circumcised themselves. As to parental choice, no circumcision may be performed on an infant in any part of the United States without at least one parent’s permission. I have represented over twenty infants who were circumcised without… Read more »
Well said Tom. I am a survivor of Genital Mutilation by Dr. Andrew Cserny of Eldorado, IL. I hate what he did to me – I never asked for it, never wanted it and never consented to it. In fact, I am quite certain I made screams of revolt as he ignored my cries and proceeded to amputate functional parts of my reproductive system for no good reason. Shame on him for doing this to me. Doctors need to fess up, stop the lies, stop the criminal assault of children, stop the profitable forced cosmetic amputations, stop mutilating helpless children… Read more »
You are so right Tom. I think the rate of complications is actually higher. For example, if one has hair on the shaft of the penis when the penis is erect then he is probably the victim of a botched circumcision. This apparently is a common complaint among circumcised men. Other problems abound and are often hidden. The pediatric urologist on the most recent AAP committee has been quoted as saying that some 20% of his practice involves repairing or correcting circumcisions. Most of my law practice involves botched circumcisions. And I find out about many cases too late to… Read more »
Not to take away from the topic.. but hair on the shaft of the penis is not indication of a botched circumcision.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2611618/?page=1
I have a botched circumcision and had my skin adhesion/skin bridge corrected at 21 and I’m completely against circumcision of boys. However; I have hair all the way up to my scar and I would say example D from the link I provided is closest to what I have. Hair on the shaft is a natural occurrence.
Rob, um, how old this study? And how old are you? It’d be interesting to see a new study, because I’m afraid that the examples I see in this link you provide all seem to be circumcised. Perhaps the conductor was, as researchers seem to be today, either completely oblivious to the fact that men aren’t born circumcised, or wilfully ignorant of the fact? Have you considered that the reason you have hair all the way up to your scar means that that much skin was taken away from you? Glad to hear you are against the forced circumcision of… Read more »
I’m 36, and how many studies do you know of that actually check hair growth on the penis? LOL This topic comes up on the foreskin restoration forum sometimes but it does naturally occur. I’ve been harmed enough by circumcision, but I’m not gonna say my extreme hairiness was caused by it.. I am very hairy.